In Re: Est. of J. Tecce, Appeal of: Tecce, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

In Re: Est. of J. Tecce, Appeal of: Tecce, T.

DecidedNovember 18, 2024

Docket2593 EDA 2023

StatusUnpublished

This text of In Re: Est. of J. Tecce, Appeal of: Tecce, T. (In Re: Est. of J. Tecce, Appeal of: Tecce, T.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re: Est. of J. Tecce, Appeal of: Tecce, T., (Pa. Ct. App. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

J-S28045-24

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

IN RE: ESTATE OF JOSEPH TECCE, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DECEASED : PENNSYLVANIA : : : APPEAL OF: TANYA TECCE : No. 2593 EDA 2023

Appeal from the Decree Entered September 12, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County Orphans’ Court at No(s): 040-2018

BEFORE: STABILE, J., MURRAY, J., and LANE, J.

MEMORANDUM BY LANE, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 18, 2024

Tanya Tecce (“Tecce”) appeals from the decree which: (1) found she

failed to establish that the will of her father, Joseph Tecce (“the Decedent”),

resulted from undue influence; (2) granted nonsuit, on her citation sur appeal,

in favor of Joseph Tecce, Jr. (“Brother”), Roseanna Giannone (“Giannone”),

and Matthew Ferragame (“Executor”); and thus (3) directed that the Register

of Wills probate Decedent’s June 29, 2017 will (“June 2017 will”). We affirm.

The Decedent had two adult children: Tecce and Brother. Tecce has

three children, who were the Decedent’s only grandchildren. See N.T.,

11/1/22, at 14. For approximately eighteen years until his death, the

Decedent lived with his girlfriend, Giannone, who had three children. Executor

is Giannone’s son.

In the winter and spring of 2017, the Decedent took anti-anxiety

medication. In March 2017, when the Decedent was seventy-eight years old,

he underwent chemotherapy treatment, which caused congestive heart failure J-S28045-24

and breathing difficulties. He contacted an attorney, John Conner, Esquire

(“Attorney Conner”), to prepare a will. Attorney Conner visited the Decedent

in his hospital room twice, a few days apart, and drafted a will (“March 2017

will”). This will bequeathed percentages of the Estate as follows: (1) thirty

percent each to Brother and Giannone; (2) fifteen percent to Tecce; (3) fifteen

percent to Tecce’s adult son, Alessandro Tecce (“Alessandro”); 1 and (4) the

remaining ten percent to be divided equally among the Decedent’s

grandchildren. At trial, the Respondents presented an unsigned copy of this

will.2 Subsequently, the Decedent began a different chemotherapy treatment.

The parties do not dispute that approximately three months later, on

Father’s Day, June 18, 2017, Tecce and the Decedent had an argument at the

Decedent’s home. Giannone, Brother, and Brother’s wife were present. At

trial, Brother testified that the day after, the Decedent told him the reason for

the argument: Tecce had previously asked the Decedent for money for

the first and last month’s deposit [to rent] a house in Narberth[. The Decedent considered this request] until finding out that [Tecce’s] primary home in Clifton Heights was being foreclosed, which [she] did not tell him about. [Tecce] had been renting out her primary house and with that rent money, she was renting an additional apartment for herself in Wyn[ne]wood. [The Decedent] relayed he was upset that she had three properties and he didn’t know. [Brother testified] that . . . his father and sister . . . had the blowup at the Father’s Day dinner. . . . [Brother was not] sure of the amount, but was aware [the Decedent] was concerned ____________________________________________

1 At this time, Tecce’s two other children were minors.

2 Executor testified that he has not seen a signed copy of the March 2017 will.

See N.T., 8/16/23, at 86.

-2- J-S28045-24

about [Tecce’s] financial responsibility and would complain about [Tecce] wanting money from him, especially after that Father’s Day.

Orphans’ Court Opinion, 2/28/24, at 24 (citing N.T., 8/16/23, at 99-100).

Giannone testified that in early June 2017, Tecce discussed a lease first

with her, and then the Decedent. See id. at 13. Giannone did not know the

amount of money Tecce asked the Decedent for, although she heard the

Decedent ask Tecce how much money she had in her bank account. See id.

at 13-14. After Tecce left, the Decedent “was upset.” Id. at 13. Giannone

further stated that the Decedent “would confide in telling her how [Tecce]

needed to help herself,” and he “consistently” felt this way “well before 2017.”

Id. Subsequently, the Decedent told Tecce over the phone “that he was not

going to help her financially.” Id. Later, during the Father’s Day argument,

Tecce was upset and told the Decedent, “[Y]ou never did anything for me. I

always had to do it for myself,” and “Happy f[—]ing Father’s Day you

a[--]hole.” Id. at 14. The Decedent swore back at Tecce. Id. Giannone

testified: the argument lasted less than “a few minutes;” afterward, the

Decedent “was visibly shaking and crying;” and Giannone “was concerned she

might have to call the hospital, but after some time and taking a Xanax, he

calmed down.” Id.

At trial, Tecce denied asking the Decedent for money during the Father’s

Day visit. She testified: she did not know “how the argument started;” the

Decedent did not indicate “why he was angry with” her; and “[i]t just didn’t

-3- J-S28045-24

make sense [why] he was mad.” N.T., 11/1/22, at 51-52. Tecce stated: the

argument lasted “[a] minute or two;” the Decedent told her, “[F—] you;”

Tecce “was shocked” and also said “[F—] you;” and then she and Alessandro,

who was in the bathroom, left. Id. The Decedent did not appear to be angry

at anyone else. See id.

Several days later, the Decedent contacted Attorney Conner to revise

his will. Attorney Conner testified that he received a fax from the Decedent,

setting forth amendments to his March 2017 will. The fax included the

Decedent’s handwritten note:

Note: — My daughter has been a problem her entire life[.] On Father’s Day she cussed me out after I spent 2½ months in the hosp. [sic]. My son[, his wife, and Giannone were] present.

[Tecce] wanted me to bail her out financially — she has several degrees and should be able to get a job [and] support herself.

This is not the first [unintelligible]. My daughter needs professional help.

Fax from the Decedent to Attorney Conner, 6/28/17, Respondents’ Trial

Exhibit R-3.

Attorney Conner talked with the Decedent, “to clarify the ‘substantial

changes’” and to discuss “some of the challenges that could result from” a

new will. Orphans’ Court Opinion, 2/28/24, at 20. Attorney Conner drafted

the revised will, and the Decedent visited his office on June 29, 2017, to sign

it. The Decedent reiterated the reasons for the changes were “[t]hat he had

challenges with his relationship with his daughter,” and he discussed the

-4- J-S28045-24

Father’s Day argument. Id. Attorney Conner stated the Decedent “was not

agitated,” “seemed to care about [Tecce], but was upset and disappointed and

wanted to make sure she did not receive any of his estate,” and further stated

that Tecce “needed professional help.” Id. at 21. Attorney Conner did not

recall if he asked why the Decedent wished to make will revisions regarding

his grandchildren. See id. at 20. He advised the Decedent “to get rid of the

March 2017 will since it was revoked by the June 2017 will.” Id. at 21.

The new, June 2017 will removed Tecce and the grandchildren as heirs,

while increasing the testamentary shares to Brother and Giannone as follows:

sixty percent to Brother and forty percent to Giannone. Additionally, the will

named Giannone’s son, Executor, as the executor.

Three months thereafter, on September 30, 2017, the Decedent passed

away.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI